democracy unfiltered. we are funded by these television companies and more, including mediacom. >> nearly 30 years ago, mediacom was founded on a powerful idea, bringing cutting-edge broadband to underserved communities. from coast to coast, we connect with 850,000 miles of fiber. our team broke the speed barriers, delivered one gig speed to every customer, has led the way to developing a 10 g platform, and now mediacom mobile is offering the fastest, most reliable network on the go. mediacom, decades of dedication, decades of deliveries, decades ahead. >> mediacom supports c-span as a public service, along with these giving you a front row seat to democracy. ♪ p next lieutenant general john daniel caine testified before the senate armed services committee for his nomination to serve as chair of joint chiefs

of sta he was questioned on his political loyalty to president trump and whether it would impact his decision-making process. this hearing is 2.5 hours. [indistinct conversations] [indistinct conversations]

[indistinct conversations] , president's choice to serve as [indistinct conversati] [indistinct conversations]

[indistinct conversations] >> all come to order. our eager members of the fourth estate are welcome to to clear away. thanking them for their presence. this morning, the committee meets to consider the nomination of retired lieutenant general john caine for chairman of joint chiefs of staff. general caine has a tremendous response ability before him. i believe president trump has made an excellent choice in selecting him to meet the challenges. i thank general caine for his willingness to serve our country, especially in this hour of need. we live in the most dangerous national security moment since world war ii. aggressors led by the chinese communist party and vladimir

putin's russia means us harm. this axis does not want this entry to be an american-led century or freedom led century. our adversaries have started two wars against ukraine and israel. they threatened to open a third front against taiwan. we must restore peace and we can do that only through strength. since his nomination was announced, some people had written that general caine is unqualified. they pointed out he was not serving as a combatant commander, as a service chief or vice chairman. i would suggest these same people read -- re-read the goldwater nichols act of 1986. those who read that law and then read general caine's resume will

see that the architects of that legislation would conclude their reforms were successful. the guiding force behind goldwater nichols was to require jointness. they believe when our military services work together, they are greater than the sum of their parts. general caine agrees and his record reflects that. he began his career as an air force fighter pilot in 1992. by the time was he done, general caine operated in every domain and developed relationships with every service. that would not have been true 40 years ago. general caine flu and commanded aircraft, but also worked for the department of agriculture, having helped in the wake of hurricane katrina in the midst of a bird flu outbreak. at the white house, general

caine wrote early homeland security strategies. he commanded -- in iraq and syria, serving in various special operations units. he ran our most secretive programs for all military services. he worked extensively as the cia's senior military officer, again, collaborating with every military service and combatant command. it is difficult to imagine a better joint and interagency background for a nominee for this position. our threat environment is complex and general caine understands how the services can work together to me today's dangers. we have much work to do. we need to grow our defense budget. we need to reform the pentagon's processes drastically. if confirmed, general caine would play a significant role in providing military advice to the secretary of defense and the

president of the united states on both of those topics. in particular, the chairman places a difficult role in the requirements process. i hope you will make a priority to modernize this critical aspect. the statutory role of the chairman may be limited, but the position is explicitly the voice of the combatant commanders. your voice matters because the commanders are largely absent from our climate and budgeting processes. the chairman can and should be an advocate for a more agile planning process. one that considers the problems and ongoing -- the problems of simultanety and protracted warfare. these are technical terms for very straightforward facts. first, that our adversaries are

likely to act against us in a coordinated fashion, simultaneously. secondly, once that war breaks out, it ends to take on a life of its own. lastly, the scherrman is responsible for delivering a serious, honest chairman risk assessment to this committee. i look forward to general caine's thoughts on each of these points. based on my conversations with the nominee and these actions in uniform, i'm confident general caine will give president trump his best military advice. he will do so without bias, as he's required to do. he would not consider whether the president may like or dislike that advice. that is exactly what the united states president deserves. i'm convinced general caine sees this role is absolutely nonpartisan. we can argue politics up here on

this dais, but i expect general caine to stay out of it. i thank the nominee for his service and for appearing today, and i turned out to my friend and colleague, ranking member read. sen. reed: welcome and congratulations on your nomination. i would like to extend my appreciation to your family because i know they have been with you throughout your entire career and they are with you today. i want to offer my deepest condolences to the families of u.s. army soldiers who tragically lost their lives in with the way ne-yo during a mission -- in lit the weenie huania last week. six weeks ago, president trump abruptly dismissed general brown who was not even halfway into his tenure as chairman of the joint chiefs of staff. secretary of defense hegseth

dismissed several other senior officers, including admiral franchetti, the chief of naval operations, general james rice, the air force chief of staff, and all three judge advocate generals for the army, navy and air force. to this day, no explanation has been given for the dismissal of these officers. as such, i remain deeply concerned they were dismissed for political reasons which sends a chilling message throughout the ranks. i would take a moment to salute general brown who served this nation and were oblique for more than four decades and let the joint chiefs with dedication and skill. he and each of the officers who were dismissed outstanding careers in the military and represented our nation with great courage and distinction. we all owe them a debt of gratitude for their service and sacrifices. general caine, i trust you understand a fraud situation in which you will be nominated to

be the chairman of the joint chiefs. in this regard, your distinguish record of service is encouraging. as an f-16 pilot with thousands of flight hours, you have served with distinction in the air force and air national guard. we will also served in senior leadership roles of the pentagon, the white house and overseas, including in the special operations and intelligence communities. if confirmed, you will serve as the principal military advisor to the president, the national security council, the secretary of defense, and congress. you will be expected to be an effective strategist, advisor and manager, and your counsel will be relied upon as we confront the multitude of national security issues before us. we face significant challenges. china clearly remains our primary competitor, challenge of the interest of the u.s. and allies. at the same time, russia remains a violent, destabilizing force.

nations like iran and north korea continue to push the boundaries. to succeed in this environment, the u.s. military must better develop its joint capabilities, including space, cyber and information. moreover, we must not lose the combined strength of our allies, nor can we abandon the soft power of our diplomatic and humanitarian efforts. to retreat to fortress america will encourage our adversaries to assert their influence throughout the world. general caine, i'm interested to know and how you will ensure the military remains the world's premier fighting force. if confirmed, you will be performing assessments to ensure each of the services are procuring the right capabilities needed for the joint force. the chairman must review capabilities holistically across the total force which can conflict with the priorities of individual services.

the committee would be interested to learn how you plan to manage this dynamic. in addition, the national defense strategy, the national military strategy, and the annual chairman's risk assessment are vital documents for oversight functions. as the the administration begins its work to review and revise the documents, general caine, i would like your assessment of the current strategy and whether you would recommend any changes to these documents. finally, the joint force is fundamentally about people. as the nation's most senior military officer come it will be your response ability to understand the needs of america service members and to be their greatest advocate. if confirmed, you will be the most visible military officer in the nation. it will be critical for you to represent the force with total professionalism and trustworthiness. frankly, i'm concerned about the health of the civilian military relations in our country. over the past several months,

the military has been dragged into dangerous political fights. public trust in the military is eroding. i fear the military's trust in civilian leadership has been shaken. it is a sacred duty that must be carried out responsibly and not exploited. i would like to know how you would work to improve civil military relations and demonstrate this as well as yourself every day. above files -- above all else, provide your best military advice to the president and secretary of defense even if that advice is not what they want to hear. the safety of our service members the american people depends upon such candor. general caine, if confirmed, he will lead the joint force at a momentous time. i thank you and i look forward to your testimony. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: thank you, senator reed. general caine, we will now hear your testimony.

you're recognized. gen. caine: thank you, senator, chairman wicker, ranking member reed, members of this committee. my name is john caine and i am honored and humbled to sit here today to be the president's nominee to be the 22nd chair of the joint chiefs of staff. i would like to thank the president and the secretary for the trust and confidence in me, allowing me to serve our great nation. i would like to thank general brown and his wife and their family for the more than 40 years of safe list -- selfless service to our nation. i would like to help the team that helped prepare me for this hearing today. finally, i would like to thank my family and friends who have given me so much. it is my family that has made my service possible always have their own expense. they have given more than i have and are not words to express my thanks to each of them, especially my family and the

nation's midwest. i sit here before you the proud son of an air force fighter pilot who flew f-4 phantoms in vietnam. my mom was a pediatric yuriko kerner's -- a pediatric critical care nurse who worked nights. i learned about service from my parents and the other members of my family who served not because it was easy but because it was the right thing to do. in our family, we serve. when asked, we always say yes. senators, i acknowledge i'm an unconventional nominee. these are unconventional times. it is 9:48 p.m. in beijing, 6:48 p.m. in tehran, 4:48 p.m. in moscow and 10:48 p.m. in pyongyang. as we sit here now, our nation faces an unprecedented rise in global risk.

our adversaries are advancing. global nuclear threats are on the rise. our national defense requires urgent action and reform across the board. we must goes faster. we must move with a sense of urgency. we can never forget our number one job is to create peace through overwhelming strength and if need be, fight and win our nations wars. i realize for many americans, i am an unknown leader and it is with a heart full of gratitude i have been given a truly unique set of experiences that i believe have prepared me to be the 22nd chairman. for the past 34 years come i have served in the active title task force in the title 42 national guard force, the title 50 force at the cia. i have served in the interagency and the white house and i have deployed in combat as a fighter pilot a special operations

officer and a cia officer. i have been an entrepreneur and investor in the business sector while a citizen soldier in the national guard. i've had the privilege of serving three presidents from both political parties and most recently was the associate director for military affairs of the cia. a job where i was charged to provide military advice to the director of the cia and globally integrate dod and cia activities across the world. along the way, i have probably serve a long time some of america's most incredible warriors and civilian teammates and their families. i have witnessed them do awe-inspiring things in the service of our nation and to a person they have poured more into me then i could ever have poured into them. especially our noncommissioned officer board. sadly, i have been there with them as they made the ultimate sacrifice on the fields of

battle and been with their families as we told them of the loved one service and sacrifice. i think of our fallen every single day. these experience helped me to better understand how our nation considers and uses military force to achieve our national security objectives. and they directly inform my views of the importance of carefully considering the use of that force and the risks associated with it beforehand and always asking the important question and then what before we do. and if the decision is made to use military force crushing our enemies and winning. i have also had the privilege of serving alongside incredible business leaders, starting and scaling companies as an entrepreneur, and along the way i learned what a different kind of grit looks like. our american entrepreneurial spirit is a force multiplier and

my time as an entrepreneur has made me a better general officer and leader. if confirmed, i will bring more of that spirit into the joint force. senators, i am here today to earn your trust and the trust of the american people. i confirmedf, i will continue to work as i have for my entire 34 years in uniform always focused on the mission and our incredible people. if confirmed, i will continue the traditions and standards of my oath of office and my commission as a nonpartisan leader who will always strive to do the right thing. chairman wicker, ranking member reed, and members of the committee, thank you for your time and consideration. as we gather here today, let us never forget our deployed forces and their families, and may we always remember our fallen and their families, especially those three that senator reed mentioned and the one missing. i look forward to your questions. chair wicker: thank you very much, general caine.

i'm required to ask you some standard questions that we ask of all nominees in your situation. and so, if you will just answer yes or no to these questions. keep your talk button pressed. have you adhered to the applicable laws and regulations with conflict of interest? gen. caine: yes. chair wicker: have you assumed any duties or taken any actions that would appear to presume the outcome of? the confirmation process gen. caine: no, i have not. chair wicker: exercising oversight legislative makes it important that this committee and other committees receive testimony, briefings, reports, records and other information from the executive branch on a timely basis. do you agree if confirmed to appear and testify before this committee when requested? gen. caine: i do. chair wicker: do you agree when

asked before this committee to give your personal views, even if your views differ from the administration? gen. caine: i do. chair wicker: you agree to provide records, documents and electronic communications in a timely manner when requested by the committee, subcommittees or other appropriate committees of congress and to consult with the requester regarding the basis for a good faith delay or denial in providing such records? gen. caine: i do. chair wicker: will you ensure your staff complies with deadlines established by this committee for the production reports, records and other information, including timely responding to hearing questions for the record? gen. caine: i will. chair wicker: two more. we cooperate in providing witnesses and briefings in response to congressional requests? gen. caine: yes, i will. chair wicker: will those witnesses and briefers for protected from reprisal? gen. caine: they will. chair wicker: thank you very

much. let me start out by asking about some hyperbole that may have been out there in the press. general caine, did you wear a maga hat in front of the president? gen. caine: no, sir. chair wicker: did you wear a maga hat at any time? gen. caine: no, sir. chair wicker: would you like to elaborate? gen. caine: for 3 years4, i have upheld my oath of office in my commitment to my commission and i have never worn any political merchandise. chair wicker: thank you for that answer. the previous chairman of the joint chiefs of staff have somewhat equivocated when asked about topline spending issues. i think you know about the proposals that will soon be before the senate and congress.

is it in your best military advice, based on your experience, is it your opinion we need real growth in the defense budget to maintain deterrence against the very capital cities and interests that you mentioned in your testimony? gen. caine: thank you for that question. we definitely must have a sense of urgency related to the budget. i think it comes down to ultimately finding more deployable or allocated capital and is three ways to do that. we can find greater efficiency in the budget through cost savings. we can reprogram from different programs. or we can get a higher topline. i think in terms of a business model where we get more revenue. we've got to move quickly and figure out how we can get real purchasing growth over time. chair wicker: ok. well, let's talk about efficiency.

in the special operations community and with the cia, you have worked with some of the most innovative and risk-taking parts of the national security enterprise. you also mentioned your experience in the private sector, which i think can serve you well. startup ventures in the private sector, is that right? gen. caine: yes, sir. chair wicker: and if confirmed, we will conduct oversight on the military's requirement processes. we hear constantly from our combatant commanders that it takes year for the military needs to be converted into requirements. based on your experience, do you believe the requirements process needs to be fixed? do you agree with those that say it needs to be torn down and rebuilt to get our war fighters what they need according to a

timeline in which they needed? gen. caine: senator, i definitely agree something has to be done. the solution is probably somewhere in the middle. i don't know we need to tear the whole thing down. i definitely agree that we need to improve the speed and agility of our requirements process. technology is evolving so fast. our requirements process does not evolve at the same time. we've got to have our combatant commanders' voice in the requirements process. the one area we also need to do is keep a global picture on those requirement processes. no two combatant commands have the same requirements and only the joint staff has the global view on those requirements, along with osd> . if confirmed, i would like to continue to work with you and the rest of congress to sort through this. chair wicker: have you had a chance to read my white paper

on the forge act and that proposed legislation? gen. caine: yes. chair wicker: don't you agree it is a masterful piece of legislation? gen. caine: i do, sir. it was a beautiful read, sir. chair wicker: would you like to elaborate on that? gen. caine: i think it certainly lays out a lot of good markers for improvement of the requirements process. chair wicker: you have worked in the private sector and you have worked with startups. the number of people in dod who have to touch something, touch and idea -- an idea, signed off on an idea to get something done is far different from those people who are actually making innovative changes in the private sector, is that correct? gen. caine: yes, sir. chair wicker: and do you agree then that we need to move in the

direction of efficiency and that a lot of the topline money that i mentioned in my second question can be found by efficiencies and moving things faster, and also can get to the war fighter what they need in a timely manner? gen. caine: yes, sir. chair wicker: i've got 12 seconds. i might do a follow-up at the end. thank you for your testimony. senator reed. sen. reed: thank you very much. general caine, as you are aware, it was recently revealed that senior trump administration officials, including the secretary of defense, was sharing sensitive information about upcoming strikes in yemen on a signal group chat. in your professional opinion, should a member of the joint chiefs or a relevant combatant commander be included in the discussion? gen. caine: thank you for the question.

i understand that the voice of the joint force had been expressed through the incredible work of the acting chairman and current vice chairman. i understand he put a statement out yesterday or the day before saying they had consulted with the secretary. from what i understand of that chat, that was a partisan, political chat so the joint force should not have been represented there. sen. reed: in your professional opinion, should the yemen strikes be discussed in a signal group chat on an unclassified platform? gen. caine: i understand that both you and the chairman have asked for an inquiry into that, so i don't want to comment specifically on that matter. what i will say is we should always preserve, we should always preserve the element of surprise and that should translate across never information domain -- every information domain and format, and never put our war fighters in any harm's way. sen. reed: if you were in that

conversation, would you have objected to the fact it was being conducted on signal? gen. caine: i was not in that chat. sen. reed: i know, that is why i asked if you were. gen. caine: senator, i have always communicating proper information in the proper channels. sen. reed: thank you. immediately following the announcement -- this is a follow-up to chairman wicker's first question -- admittedly following the announcement of your nomination, and press story -- according to the reports, the president spoke to you while you were in a on active duty and you said you loved him and "i'll kill for you, sir." the president then said you followed up his comments by putting on a make america great again. general caine, is any of this story true?

gen. caine: as i mentioned to the chairman, for 34 years, i have upheld my oath of office and the responsibilities of my commission. i think i went back and listened to those tapes and i think the president was talking about somebody else. i have never worn any political merchandise or said anything to that effect. sen. reed: thank you. during the consideration of your nomination, were you ever asked who you voted for in the last election or 2020 election? gen. caine: i was not. sen. reed: are you aware of any presently serving service members or senior civilians in dod being asked questions like this? gen. caine: i am not. sen. reed: do you agree it is the utmost importance to keep the military a political and questions like this should not be asked? gen. caine: i agree with you. sen. reed: what steps will you take to guard against the potential politicization? gen. caine: i think the question was what steps will i take to guard against politicalization.

i think it starts with being a good example from the top and making sure we are nonpartisan and apolitical and speaking truth to power every day. sen. reed: do you believe there's any situation where it would be appropriate for you not to be consulted prior to a military operation? gen. caine: senator, i am not in the job yet so i cannot imagine any hypothetical situation where i would not be in the conversation, if that's what you are asking. i believe the joint force, if confirmed and even if i am not in the job, the joint force has a responsibility to provide best options to the secretary and the president. i cannot imagine a case where the joint force would not be in the conversation. sen. reed: final question. if confirmed, and you've got 40 seconds and this is probably going to take longer than that so just brief thoughts -- how

will you ensure that the parochialism which is endemic in every organization, but certainly the department of defense, is curtailed or focused to a more joint effort? gen. caine: wlel, i approve -- well, i appreciate that and i will be quick and come back to you with more if need be. i'm encouraged by the 648 years of experience that currently exist in the joint chiefs of staff and the joint staff. i think they are all absolute professionals. sen. reed: thank you very much. gen. caine: thank you. chair wicker: thank you. senator fischer. sen. fischer: thank you. welcome, general. thank you for putting yourself forward to continue to serve your country. as you are aware, there is ongoing efforts to force the department of defense to vacate portions of key bands of the electromagnetic spectrum, particularly the lower three gigahertz and the 7/8 gigahertz

bands. do you agree that the department of defense should have a meaningful coleadership in any interagency determinations about the future use of federal spectrum? gen. caine: thanks for that question. there are certain elements of the spectrum that have unique physics associated with them that can impact our combat capabilities so we certainly want to have a voice in the conversation. sen. fischer: the you believe that it should be a coleadership? not just a seat at the table, but because of the exquisite assets that the department has an your knowledge -- and your knowledge of what those are, that you would need to have that coleadership position? gen. caine: you asked what the

views of the department was, mindful that i am not in the job yet and if confirmed, i would have that conversation with the secretary about coleadership. sen. fischer: what are the risks to national security if the department is forced to vacate those spectrum bands? gen. caine: senator, some of that may be reserved for a conversation in closed session at some point in the future, but certainly if we lose portions of that spectrum, we will lose exclusivity related to our combat capability. we don't want to tip that off to our adversaries that might be listening and would rather talk about that in closed session. sen. fischer: i look forward to having those discussions with you if you are confirmed. for the first time in history, the united states faces two new nuclear peer adversaries in china and russia. yet, our planned nuclear force

was decided in 2010 when the threat environment looked very different and it has not been reconsidered since then. for example, just over the past few years, china has surpassed the u.s. in the number of icbm launchers. russia has suspended the new star treaty and nuclear saber rattling has been a defining feature of its invasion to ukraine. north korea has claimed to test the first solid fuel icbm. i'm concerned our current programs or record may not be sufficient to address these current threats, let alone future threats. if confirmed, how will you work with the secretary, the services, stratcom to identify and address any insufficiencies so that our nuclear deterrent would remain credible? gen. caine: senator, and it must

remain credible. we must invest in the deterrence side of our nuclear triad and there's a lot of work to be done. if confirmed, i look to work with the incredible leadership at stratcom. we have a great commander whose very smart and dedicated and technically all over the program out there. this will be an area of significant emphasis to make sure we are fielding the capabilities we need. sen. fischer: have you had an opportunity to review the strategic commissions 2023 report? gen. caine: i have not. sen. fischer: i would highly recommend you do so. it very clearly articulates threats and identifies potential gaps in our capabilities and it makes a number of actionable recommendations, many of which were included in last year's ndaa. finally, the nuclear arm cilantro cruise missile is an ab

program of record that has been supported by this committee on a strong bipartisan basis. i was pleased to see you a form the importance in your advanced policy questions. can you explain to this committee the importance of providing the president with additional theater nuclear options? gen. caine: when we look at the global laydown of nuclear weapons you alluded to, united states having an additional option is a key and essential component to her overall deterrence. that is where it fits into the equation. sen. fischer: so, it is important that our commander in chief would have those options? gen. caine: i won't get out in front of the president. it may be a decision that he has a different view on, but the joint force should offer him that option for his consideration based on the needs of the deterrent capabilities. sen. fischer: and it is a program of record? gen. caine: yes. sen. fischer: thank you. chair wicker: thank you.

senator shaheen. sen. shaheen: congratulations on your nomination and thank you for your willingness to continue to serve the country. i appreciated the time we spent in my office talking about this role and the challenges that you will be facing. one of the things we discussed was the women peace and security legislation that was signed by president trump during his first term and it mandates that women should be at the table in conflict resolution and peace negotiations. at dod, that has meant having women involved in security cooperation programs that really give us, i think, an advantage over our adversaries like china and russia. can you just for the record, are you familiar with the wps program? gen. caine: i am, yes. sen. shaheen: do you believe

that is a dei program? gen. caine: i do not. sen. shaheen: can you provide some examples of the operational advantage that, from your perspective, this gives us? gen. caine: well, i can just give you my own personal recollections from being deployed before. this was a precursor of the program but when we would go out on the to the field after concluding an assault, we would have members, female members who would speak with those women and children who were on the objective and helped us to understand the human terrain in a new and novel way. wps is a program that helps us to understand the full spectrum of challenges in front of us. sen. shaheen: thank you for that. one of the combatant commands that have been effective in using the wps law has been indopay com.

can you talk about how this contributes to the mission it has? gen. caine: i not familiar with the -- i'm not familiar with the specific example. if confirmed, i will look into it and come back to you with my thoughts on that matter. sen. shaheen: i appreciate that. we have been hearing some rumors that have suggested the administration is considering ending the dual hat policy under which our commander of european command serves as the supreme allied commander of nato. the commander of ucomm has served as the supreme allied commander since eisenhower and part of the reason is to ensure u.s. control of weapons prevents nuclear proliferation in europe. i will not ask you to comment on what the policy of this administration may or may not be since i assume it has not been determined but can you talk about the importance of u.s. leadership in nato as a result

of this dual hat arrangement, and how would you approach obligations with nato partners? gen. caine: allies and partners are a critical component to our ability to protect and defend our values and virtues around the world. nato is a key component to that. the president has been clear on his views and the importance of nato, as has the secretary. related to whether or not it stays, i will defer to the president on that. i think that is a discussion these currently ongoing. for me in particular, i value our allies and partners. if confirmed, that will be a significant portion of the job. sen. shaheen: i appreciate that the policy decision but what i really asking is what the advantages for the united states in having it be an american? gen. caine: as always, any we

have u.s. forces deployed, we generally have wanted them under u.s. command. that is the history behind the establishment and putting the dual hat commander together. i think it is an opportunity for global leadership, particularly in europe, but again i would defer to the president as he considers with the future policy may look like. sen. shaheen: i know that senator reed asked you this question. and it was part of your official questions from senator wicker. but, when you have situations where your military advice may be different from the direction the administration is heading on policy, how do you intend to approach those situations and how would you continue to make sure that the military perspective that you are supposed to represent is actually being presented?

gen. caine: the same way i have for 34 years, with candor. candor has gotten me here today and candor will continue to allow me to do my job moving forward. the president does not have to accept the military advice from the secretary, the nsc, but we owe it to them for us to deliver that and military advice. sen. shaheen: thank you. chair wicker: thank you, senator. senator cotton. sen. cotton: congratulations on your nomination and thank you for your 34 years of service. thank you for your service at times in the intelligence community where your reputation is as strong as it is paid let's continue on the theme of senator shaheen's question about providing your candid military advice. i think is the chairman and senator reed pointed out, a lot of people don't understand that the chairman of the joint chiefs is not in the chain of command, is that correct? gen. caine: yes, sir. sen. cotton: your role as the

principal military advisor. if the president makes a decision on this, that or the other, that goes from him to the secretary of defense down to some other commander, say the centcom commander or the secretary of the army, what have you. you are giving advice to everyone but not actually carrying out decisions in the chain of command. gen. caine: that is correct. sen. cotton: i think congress gave the chairman that role because we wanted someone who was free from those day to day demands, operational or managerial duties, to provide that candid military advice. as senator shaheen said, it is important that you provide that advice even when you think the principal does not want to hear it, the secretary of defense, or the nsc bore the president. i think you said in your opening statement, an unconventional nominee -- i agree with that. i think most of you would as well. you don't strike me as the kind

of guy who has been angling for this job for 34 years. is that a fair statement? gen. caine: that would be a fair statement. sen. cotton: did you excite to get this job as recently as three or six month ago? gen. caine: i did not. sen. cotton: so, is there any reason to think you are not going to be providing your candid and best professional military advice even and maybe especially when a little birdie has tipped you off that maybe the secretary where the president does not want to hear what you have to say? gen. caine: no. i went to vmi where i lived in the new barracks for four years and i looked out on a statue of george marshall for four years. if i failed to provide my candid advice, i think general marshall would climb out of his grave and hunt me down. sen. cotton: thank you. i think every president, every nsc, every secretary of defense needs that especially from a chairman. not to give them their candid

advice when it is welcomed and even when they know it is on welcomed. as you said, you're an advisor, not a commander. once the secretary or the president made the decision, you are on the side making sure that decision will be carried out by the relevant commanders, right? gen. caine: yes, sir. sen. cotton: let's look at something specific in this area, and that is the threat of iran's nuclear program. by some estimates, could be weeks away from having testable, if not workable nuclear devices. maybe a couple years away from having missiles that can hit us in the u.s. the president has said repeatedly that he wants a peaceful resolution to this crisis, but he's also said i think as recently as last week "if they don't make a deal, there will be bombing." he said for at least a decade i have known him that iran cannot be allowed to get a nuclear weapon. do agree with the president's assessment?

gen. caine: i do. sen. cotton: and do you agree that because of their missile program, especially the flimsy cover of the space launch program, that this is not just a threat to our troops in the region or israel or our arab friends in the region, this could be an imminent threat to the u.s. itself in just a few short years? gen. caine: i think that is an accurate statement. sen. cotton: if the president asks for military options to support what he has said publicly, if iran is not willing to make a deal that there will be bombing, you commit to provide him the best and candid advice you can about viable military options and the likely consequences of each? sen. cotton: i think that is with the job of the joint staff is to do, provide a range of options for the president to consider and then allow him to select whatever those options work best for him. sen. cotton: thank you.

finally, there is some hysteria about the prospect of the president ordering these strikes or someone like you providing advice that will lead to another forever war, another endless war. are you aware of operations, maybe operations against iran, like the tinker wars in 1988 in which the force for but the three minute application of military power did not lead to a forever war or endless war, but rather led to peace ends the ability? gen. caine: yes, those examples in our history do exist. sen. cotton: may be the sulemani strike in 2012. chair wicker: you can answer that question verbally, senator kaine -- general caine. you nodded your head. gen. caine: yes, i was not sure exotic what the question was but i agree with you, senator. chair wicker: thank you.

senator blumenthal. sen. blumenthal: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you, general caine for visiting my office, for your service and your family, you have a record that is exemplary and lengthy. you have served in the air force, the air national guard, and within the intelligence community with extraordinary distinction. this position is not one that you thought, is it? gen. caine: no, sir. sen. blumenthal: or never expected. gen. caine: no, sir. sen. blumenthal: the reason is quite simply that the president of the united states decided to fire the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff for political and personal reasons, and i must say that i find that abhorrent. and i know that you are not

going to comment in those terms on the treatment of your potential predecessor, but would you agree with me that politicization of the military is something that should be avoided at all costs? gen. caine: yes, sir. the nation and the constitution all require a nonpartisan military. sen. blumenthal: would you agree with me that this apparent myth, because you have credibly denied it, that you wore a maga hat is extremely regrettable and unfortunate? gen. caine: i just know that i have always upheld my oath of office and don't believe the president said i was wearing a maga hat, from what i've listened to the tapes. sen. blumenthal: you don't believe he ever said it, but it has been attributed to him. gen. caine: maybe he was talking

to someone else when i listened to the tapes. sen. blumenthal: let me ask you because of your extraordinary service, and i cannot imagine anyone better qualified to answer this question -- if you heard that a mission of the kind that was discussed on an unse cure platform, signal, and you were in one of those planes about to launch on that mission against the houthis, knowing what to do about the sensitive -- the substance of that conversation, how would you feel? gen. caine: i stand by what i said before. i think we all can agree we need to always protect the element of surprise. sen. blumenthal: and that element of surprise was very likely lost if there had been any intercept by one of our enemies or adversaries that can be conveyed to the houthis,

correct? gen. caine: that's a little bit of a hypothetical question, but i'm thankful as always that we protect our servicemen and women who are going into combat operations. sen. blumenthal: but, there are a lot of pilots and other military men and women who are understandably angry about that call, correct? gen. caine: i'm not -- had anybody come to me and tell me they are angry about it. i cannot comment on that. sen. blumenthal: have you read reports about that reaction to the call? gen. caine: i have not, no. sen. blumenthal: would you agree that that kind of reliance on signal for that kind of conversation should be avoided in the future? gen. caine: i just know that i have always used the right system for the right kinds of

communications. i don't know in particular what information was classified in what way on that signal chat. i know we must preserve the element of surprise. sen. blumenthal: that platform is not a hardened and secured platform. gen. caine: that platform is encrypted, but not secure, i believe in the definition of the term secure. sen. blumenthal: let me ask you quickly on another topic. would you agree that the columbia-class program is the navy's -- should continue to be an acquisition priority along with the virginia class? gen. caine: i do think columbia needs to continue forward at a pace and tempo equal to the threat. sen. blumenthal: my time is expired. thank you. chair wicker: thank you.

senator rounds. sen. rounds: thank you for taking the time in my office to visit with me about the number of the items you are hearing about today. i want to go back specifically to an item that senator fischer began talking to you about and that is with regard to the spectrum and the challenges surrounding it. the reason i want to use that as an example is because i know that general milley and general brown both in their role as the chief of staff, and providing their best military opinion and advice, were put in a position literally of saying to other people within other administrations that this particular part of the electromagnetic spectrum which is currently controlled by the department of defense is critical to our national defense. in fact, over the last several years, i have asked in front of

this particular committee well over two dozen uniformed officers to specifically discuss the need to maintain control of specific portions of the electronic spectrum. in particular, i have asked whether or not the 3.1 gigahertz band, if we were to lose that from dod's specific use, if that would negatively -- would have negative consequences for a war fighting capabilities. i have had 100% agreement that if we lost that, it would have negative consequences. would you agree with that assessment? gen. caine: i would. sen. rounds: thank you. you will be asked at some point because this is a valuable commodity. there's a limited amount of electromagnetic spectrum available but their interest within the united states that would love to have access to this without regard or understanding with the impact would be on our national defense. are you aware that under

president trump's proposed concept of a golden dome or a missile protection system that a number of the radar systems that would be required to be in effect for that to move forward are found within the 3.1 to 3.45 portions of the special because of their unique physical -- or physics competencies? gen. caine:lt. gen. caine: sen'm familiar with the basics of that competency. i'm not sure what radars golden dawn has brought into their equipment, but that would not surprise me. sen. rounds: thank you. this has been a concern by the committee, that any person that has the role of the chairman of the joint chiefs recognizes how serious their role is with regards to providing a -- to a

very powerful group of individuals. the best professional military advice that they can provide come in recognizing that while you do not control the policy they set, your role, as this committee sees it, is come in many cases, the last resort to providing the right type of advice that elected leaders have to here come up regardless of whether or not they want to hear it. my understanding, and once again can i ask you to confirm it, do you recognize that as your primary responsibility? lt. gen. caine: senator, i think that is the most important part of this job and an essential part of this job, and if confirmed, you have my commitment that i will always speak truth to power. sen. rounds: the be 21 radar is one of the most capable platforms the military has ever seen. it will play a crucial role because of its ability to operate in a highly contested environment. the air force has committed at least 100 b-21's, but given

long-range strikes and nuclear deterrence, many of us believe we will need a number closer to 200 bombers. if confirmed, and will you be prepared to advocate for more than 100, as many as 200, if the war plan suggests that is what is required for our operational plans moving forward? lt. gen. caine: senator, the last part of your question i think is the key part for me, after the analysis portion, and, you know, mindful that i have not been confirmed for this role yet could i would like to speak to the other joint sheets and combatant commanders before i commit to any particular number of b-21's. it's an essential part of our program, and certainly a key component of it, but before i commit to any part of it, i would like to confirm.

sen. rounds: is that appears to be the case, you would not hesitate to recommend more, if the study warrant it. lt. gen. caine: i would not. sen. rounds: thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: thank you, senator rounds. senator hirono. sen. hirono: thank you. general caine, with all due respect, we should not be here today. as a highly respectful -- respected military leader, general brown served our country for decades. he provided exactly with the country asked of him, the best nonpartisan military advice to civilian leadership. however, for an administration that is claiming to be the most "transparent, no reasonable justification has been provided for general brown's termination,

instead, once again, president trump's intention to install yes men and women with fealty to him and not to the constitution or the american people. general, you said you will always speak truth to power if asked questions. you've indicated you will provide independent advice. let me just mention, what happens to people who stand up to president trump? general milley was a former chair of joint chiefs, stood up to president trump, and here is what happened to him. president trump took away his security detail, his security clearance, even took down his portrait in the pentagon. that is not all. general milley is now under investigation by the department of secretary-general to see if he would be able to retire as a four-star general. there's always a challenge to

stand up to this president. let me just start with two initial questions, and i will get to questions that has to do with your fitness to serve. if you became -- since you became a legal adult, have you ever made unwanted requests for sexual favors or committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature? lt. gen. caine: i have not, senator. sen. hirono: have you ever face discipline or entered into a settlement relating to this kind of content? lt. gen. caine: i have not, senator. sen. hirono: you've been asking a number of questions about what the president attributed to you, that you wore a maga hat. you testified you did not. if you did wear a maga hat, does that cost to political activity

by a uniformed officer? lt. gen. caine: senator, i did not wear any political merchandise. sen. hirono: without the partisan political activity by a uniformed officer, yes or no? lt. gen. caine: i think it probably would, yes, senator. sen. hirono: thank you. general caine, you've been asked about the signal, and i commend the chair of this committee and the ranking member for asking for an i.g. inquiry. you will be responsible for our most classified programs. have you ever discussed classified information on an unclassified medium, such as signal? lt. gen. caine: no, senator, i have not. sen. hirono: what would be the consequences for discussing a special access program on signal? lt. gen. caine: well, senator,

we would have to first do an investigation, we would have to look into the particular matters associated with it. we would have to consult with counsel to determine what the way forward was, and then ultimately turn it over to the leadership in the department. sen. hirono: and you would not just let this matter drug, which is basically what this initiation wants to do? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, is a little bit of a hypothetical situation, asking me what would happen. sen. hirono: it is not really hypothetical, it's affecting this administration and what is happening. you note that you need to preserve the element of surprise. it is discussing the kinds of matters that were discussed on signal preserving the element of surprise? lt. gen. caine: senator, given the fact that the chairman and ranking member has asked for an investigation, i do not want to comment on the particulars. i do want to stay at a strategic

altitude and say we should always preserve the element of surprise. sen. hirono: i think it was a very simple question, whether or not talking about things that have been reported, whether that preserves the element of surprise. i would say that you are truly speaking truth to power, then the answer would obviously be no, it does not preserve the element of surprise him and that is why we need to have an inquiry. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: thank you, senator hirono. senator ernst. sen. ernst: thank you, mr. chairman fit i would first like to honor the loss of a son and pray for a speedy recovery on the floor. general caine, thank you so much for being a friend of this committee today. we all understand there's a little bit of political theatrics that always occur on this committee. but i would like to thank you very much for your integrity and

your measured responses to the questions today. you are carrying yourself with dignity and respect, and that is what we would it and expect of anyone that will be serving as our -- the chairman of our joint chiefs of staff, so thank you very much for that. you had stated that you are an unconventional leader, moving forward, and i in particular and very excited about that, because you have served on active duty, active-duty air force, but also in regards to my own service, you were a national guardsmen. thank you. it gives you a very well-rounded perspective when it comes to the men and women that served in various capacities for our great armed services. but also very important to me is the fact that you have served as an entrepreneur, and this brings a different level into the position that you are hoping to

attain. that leads me into my question. i've been very focused on our defense budget, efficiency, and auditability, and we spoke about this in my office. because you have the eye of a businessman, you know that investment dollars are very important going into a business, so you will understand that every dollar going into our department of defense is also going to be very important for our war fighters and those that support them. the department of defense, despite managing the largest discretionary budget of the federal government has yet to pass a full financial audit. we understand that this failure is eroding public trust in the department and hinders our ability as congress to allocate those resources effectively, and our frustrations just continued

to grow. so, general caine, if you are confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure the dod finally passes a full audit by 2028 as required by the law, or ideally if at all possible, even sooner. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, thank you for that question. i'm not only an entrepreneur alum but also an american taxpayer, for the department to pass an audit. there are very few levers that are chairman can confirm other than to encourage the services to be prepared for that audit. that is something i will take on is confirmed for the job. yeah. thank you very much for that. in regards to our special operations forces, i served as the chair of the emerging capability subcommittee and will continue to advocate on behalf of it. they are a very cost-effective

board multiplier, and they deliver a high-impact result with a very small footprint. i know we spoke about this, you do get that. cuts risk ceding grounds to our adversaries. given our great power competition, do you believe justification exists for reducing their footprint and their budget at a time when unconventional threats are on the rise? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, mindful that i'm not in the job yet, i do understand and appreciate the exponential value that soft can bring to the competition phase that we are in right now, and, if confirmed, i would like to take that on and come back to you with my thoughts on that. sen. ernst: thank you. i will submit for the record a question on recruitment and retention challenges. i want to close by saying i'm very grateful that president

trump has nominated you to serve as our chairman for the joint chiefs of staff. i do think you will bring a different level into this position, a different eye, a different way of looking at things. we are in very challenging times. we all recognize this appeared we need a change. you are that change. so, thank you very much for being willing to serve in this capacity. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: thank you, senator . senator kaine. sen. kaine: thank you, mr. chairman. general, congratulations on your nomination. almost every member on this panel has discussed giving straight advice to the president. the oval office is probably the most intimidating room in the world, and i hope you will reiterate, you owe it to them to get the best advice. you also owe it to the country that you will give them the best

advice. you mentioned to me before you have been retired, you did not expect this? do you do not need this job. give me your straight ahead commitment that when the chips are down, you are going to argue for your best military advice. lt. gen. caine: senator, i don't know any other way to operate as a leader. my job, if confirmed, is to always provide best military advice to the president, the secretary, the nfc, and to congress, and to do so with candor every day. sen. king: that come as everybody mentioned, senator rounds mentioned this is really the principal responsibility of the job. we are in a very dangerous moment. when know potential conflicts and conflict all over the world, so you are going to be called upon, probably in a matter of weeks, to make these kinds of calls, and to provide that advice to the president.

so i look forward to you honoring that commitment that you just made, and making clear, not only providing advice, that sounds sort of neutral, but advocating for advice. this is what we believe the best military advice is. let me move on. it worries me sometimes that we have a tendency, particularly at national security, to move our focus from one area to the other. and then neglect the area that we are missing. what i am very worried about now is a resurgence of terrorism. syria come potentially, could become another base for isis. there are thousands of isis fighters in jails in syria. if they are released, that could be a major challenge. west africa is now a major area of al qaeda activity. talk to me about the terrorism threat and the fact that we can't forget it, because 19

people changed american history on september 11, and it does not take many terrorists to create serious problems for this country and for people around the world. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, i don't know that i could say it any better than you just did. we have to keep our pressure on the terrorists -- sen. king: make sure you have that in the record what he just said. [laughter] lt. gen. caine: it's not something, senator, unfortunately we can never take our eyes off completely. the challenge that somebody who would want to do harm to us or to our interests around the world is not going to go anytime soon. sen. king: and one of the concerns that i have, we always talk about deterrence. that's the mainstream of our defense strategy. but deterrence doesn't work with a terrace with a nuclear weapon. they don't have the capital to blow up. they don't care about buy-in.

the extent to which that eventuality, which i think is terrifying, is intelligence. i hope you will continue to focus your forces in then pentagon on intelligence, intervene if there is any threat of nuclear material getting into the hands of a terrorist organization. lt. gen. caine: yes, sir. sen. king: finally come in terms of your leadership, to defend the military, and i know you are passionate about it, for the war fighters, one of the things that concerns me, and i'm going from this meeting to the veterans affairs committee, is the transition from active duty military to retired, which you have experienced. and the testimony that we've had at numerous hearings is it is inadequate. it has been proved in recent years that there's still gaps. it's very complex.

military, active-duty people going into veteran status. it turns out it is the highest propensity for suicide in the first couple of years after the transition from active duty. so i hope that is something you will pay attention to. i believe that as much money, effort, and time ought to be spent on transition out as we spend on recruiting in. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, it is a bit of an arduous process. i can testify to that. i appreciate your leadership to helping veterans transition appropriately. it is an area of risk for sure. i will keep my eye on it if confirmed. sen. king: i hope you will. thanks again, general, and congratulations on your nomination. chair wicker: thank you, senator king. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you, general, for your

willingness to serve. while it's unfortunate, the dismissal of your predecessor is behind us. i cannot think of a better person to replace and then you, and, frankly, the unconditional -- unconventionalness of your pick is brilliant, in my view. when you look at the actual service and the diversity, i just cannot imagine a better choice, soak congratulations on that, and i look forward to supporting you strongly. in your opening statement, you said something that we hear a lot from people who come before the committee, and your response to chairman wicker's legislation, acquisition reforms, very welcoming. but everyone says that. everyone says that. and he and this is why, frankly,

this is why you being unconventional is encouraging. and i believe that. it means that tells the particular agency, within the service they serve then, it was disruptive by the very thing they say they support. we are dealing with a situation right now, perhaps the most disruptive innovator, taking over, becoming the first director of the most disruptive, innovative agency, during a witch hunt that began on the last day of the last administration, and everybody that says they are an innovator is an innovator, so in this case, maybe we should, you know, check. all the while, satellites don't go up, all the while, china goes at the speed of china. so i believe it is a cultural problem as well as we have got some work to do in congress. but we have a culture challenge

as well. general, i would like for you to elaborate a little and how we can really make the difference, if you say you make and i believe you do want to make, so we are not just consolidating all of our industry to a couple of giants, weatherby land, air, space. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, you are hitting on an area that is a point of passion for me. we have to stop admiring the problem, and we have to start executing. i do think, to your point about culture is where it all starts. i think we have to take an ownership and entrepreneurial mindset to all of these reforms that are in front of us, and we cannot do this alone. we have to do it with you here in the congress, in order to actually make these changes. i'm encouraged by the leaders who are coming into the, department who have deep substantive business backgrounds, that are not known as people who admire problems.

so, if confirmed, i look forward to working with the various leaders in order to actually move the ball, and, of course, working with the congress to execute these things without continuing to ignore these challenges in front of us. sen. cramer: well, and i appreciate your reference to the new leaders coming in, the entrepreneurs and what not. i have the same optimism as a result of it, but i am getting anxious about actually seeing this happen, so maybe you are the leader that can make that a reality for us. when we get the best of combatant commanders, one of the things we hear over and over from commanders, of course, is intelligence surveillance, reconnaissance, isr, is in great need and low supply these days. in the air force specifically has been on a mission to eliminate isr as one of the key

missions. this appeared even as a term in several of the documents in recent years. and it is not just their fault. as we've all been talking about, we have a resource challenge in our defense department. we are trying to work on that. i guess we all have to do a lot more, for sure. i want to recognize that. but i also worry that, frankly, what we are seeing, where we are investing, i would just love the remaining time, for you to expand on isr, where you see it landing as a mission set, and maybe everybody has their own form. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, in my remaining five seconds, you know, isr and the ability to have any indications and warnings to make decisions for commanders who hold risk is a key and essential to our overall ability to execute the missions we must do.

sen. cramer: and i think the air force should keep it as a mission. i get that other services have some form. thank you. i look forward to supporting you. chair wicker: thank you, senator creamer. senator king. -- kaine. sen. kaine: thank you, mr. chairman. general, i hope my colleagues not hold your last name against you. i know for my own due diligence, gmi is very proud of you, and a lot of the questions that have been asked, kind of trying to really drill into your ability to give the best candid advice, i think your career has demonstrated to my satisfaction that you will do so. one of the things that i really like about your background, and i think senator ernst and others has comment on it, is, you know,

active guard, dod, and private sector at the pentagon, at the white house, at the cia. you have seen deep interaction with allies. you really have seen the breadth of our military mission in a way that i think is the kind of experience that would inform that judgment that you need to provide, and in fact, in a way, the role of the chairman of the joint chief that senator cotton was walking through, the work that you did at the cia was a little bit the same role. why don't you describe in a little more detail that post in the cia, what your job was in that? because i think it was almost analogous, the advice you were providing to the cia director, that advice is pretty analogous to the advice you will be providing to the commander and chief.

lt. gen. caine: well, senator, i agree. the ada is actually established by the congress to detail a three-star military officer over to the cia are under title 50 authorities, in order to provide best military advice to the director, the deputy director, and to work daily with the secretary, the chairman, the combatant commanders, and the service chiefs, in order to globally integrate same functions that the chairman has, in order to globally integrate cia and dod activities. and, if confirmed, i will continue to do that, working with the best of the title x forces, the best of title 50, with the state department can bring to the table, what the best of the interagency can bring to the table, along with our allies and partners. so, while i mindful that i have not led at the four-star level, this is not a commanders job that i'm being considered for,

it is an advisory job, and there are very similar traits. sen. kaine: in the posting you had at the cia for this important role, were you delegated by them to do that, or did you interview with the cia to get that post? lt. gen. caine: sir, i was nominated by the department and interviewed by the cia. as far as i understand it, the cia made the sen. kaine: selection. you were the nominee of the department. i do think the role is an important one. one thing i don't see in your resume but i suspect is probably there, your resume is too long, is in ructions you had with the state department over the course of your career. can you talk about that a little bit? lt. gen. caine: yes, sir, my first real interaction with the state department was when i was a u.s. fellow at the usda, and we were charged with working on a global pandemic plan surrounding the h1n1 influenza,

-- sen. kaine: during the george bush administration. lt. gen. caine: yes, sir, and that continued during my time overseas them and i have a deep regard over with the state department can do for us. sen. kaine: i think all of us at times have been frustrated with silos, you know, the states and their silo, intel and theirs, dod and their own silo peers sometimes having different perspectives is great. sometimes people are thinking, this exact same note, sometimes wondering if it is groupthink. the fact that you've been in all parts of the kind of broad national security family gives me some real confidence in your judgment coming into this position. the last thing i would just ask is, what would you say has been your signature experience over

the course of your career, in terms of interacting with allies. lt. gen. caine: well, probably, sir in two thousand three, when i, had the opportunity to work closely with our british, u.k., and australian allies, which is absolutely important from day one. i sustained all of those relationships. i have deep, close relationships with our closest allies commit if confirmed, look forward to extending those. sen. kaine: the fact that you have those relationships and have maintained them. i yelled back. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: thank you, senator . where were you exactly during that relationship? lt. gen. caine: well, sir, the location that we flew out of i think is still classified. i'm happy to talk about that in a closed session. chair wicker: ok.

thank you very much. senator scott. sen. scott: thank you, chairman . general, congratulations. you have a great background. i'm looking forward for you to succeed. this is all doable. we've got allies that are not investing like they should have. we've got iran, which appears to have enough money now to continue to support the who these, hamas, hezbollah. we got china all over latin america. we have got to do our best to police a world, is this actually doable? are you optimistic or are you pessimistic? lt. gen. caine: senator, i'm always an optimistic leader. sen. scott: and why do you believe that we could do it? lt. gen. caine: there's a lot

reasons, but the power of the american spirit is what leads off for me right off the bat. there are very few things that we cannot achieve if we set our minds to. despite some of the very serious challenges ahead of us, we've always rogered up to the challenges. sen. scott: do you think the budget provided will allow you to do what you need to do? lt. gen. caine: i will not comment about the budget, but what i will confront you is whatever capital we are given, we will make the best of it. sen. scott: in florida, we have 20 military bases and three military commands, one in homestead. we talked about this a little bit. it's not that far from cuba, you know, homestead is a little bit north of key west. it would be an important base. do you see a future for homestead?

do you think it ought to have a fine mission? lt. gen. caine: sir, i will get out in front of the service, but, if confirmed, i will talk to them to see what they think about flying mission at homestead. the history of that unit and that base is exemplary. a small component of them were there with us in the sky hub bac k in 2003, and i have a deep appreciation for the culture and history. of that unit. sen. scott: i'm the chairman of the sub committee on seapower, and as you know, we have not been able to build ships, keep ships ready, how do you think that will change? lt. gen. caine: it is a significant challenge for us, and we've got to be challenged on this. our congressional mandate,

includes our ability to sustain them and repair them around the world. sen. scott: according to the navy, they provided the combatant commanders with requirements. this is one division telework we basically requirements on. do you think this is something we should be allocating resources? lt. gen. caine: i'm sorry, could you repeat the question? sen. scott: the combatant commanders, they are only getting a portion of what they are asking. is there a better way to allocate the resources? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, i appreciate the question. the challenges we have to globally integrate all the combatant commands and there's never a loss for tension between the cocom's. when i trust is the joint staff and joint sheets are looking carefully and thoughtfully considering where that balance is and then passing those

options to the secretary for him to decide where that allocation may be. until we have such capacity that there is no need to do that, i think we are going to continue to balance those capabilities and capacities across all of cocom's. sen. scott: what drives you? why do you want to do this? let's say you did this for four years. what was your goal be at the end of those four years, to say, we got this accomplished? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, doing my part to make sure we have a safe and prosperous united states of america, that the military element of power has delivered the deterrence capability that we needed to, and we taken care of our families and our force along the way. sen. scott: thank you. you will do a great job. lt. gen. caine: thank you, senator. >> thank you very much, mr. mullin.

sen. mullin: thank you for jumping into service. you did not retire for long, and the fact that you want to go back in and serve speaks to the true spirit you have to it i want to thank you for doing that. he's made a tremendous amount of sacrifice already, and you know, eyes wide open, what this job is going to entail. you have some real challenges ahead of you, and i want to start first talking about the defense industry. i know you are familiar with the so-called last supper in 1994, where we basically encouraged our defense industry to consolidate. i'm a firm believer in looking back and looking at things, where it went wrong, because since then, our defense industry really has not been able to deliver on time. and on budget on some of the most critical needs we have. we've seen, from our plans in the air to our ships in the

shipyards to the equipment that we are needing, is constantly behind what we are needing. today, when we ask for technology that is being used against us or that our adversaries already may have achieved, when we ask our defense industry to deliver, it is five to seven years. if we are lucky, it is three, and yet it is never on time. now, you come from a unique position, being active, being reserved, and being in the private sector. i feel like this is one of the biggest threats we have. when we have the technology we need today and it is being delivered five years from now, we are five years behind. so how do you plan on tackling this? because i do feel like this is the biggest threat to our military today. lt. gen. caine: senator, i agree. it is a huge problem. technology is evolving so quickly that every time we field capabilities, they are obsolete

often times when they hit the force, and that is not acceptable. i think it goes back to something that the chairman and i talked about at the beginning of the hearing, and that is related to having agility in our acquirements, build a system of acquisition that allows us to take advantage of the current technologies, not those of the past. so, if confirmed, i will work with the joint staff, the joint chiefs, and of course osd to pick up the speed, pace, and tempo of feed capabilities so they are not obsolete. sen. mullin: how do you feel about bringing primes that are incapable of delivering in a quick fashion? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, i think we need a mix of both startups and entrance into those facilities. but we do need to primes. the answer is e, all of the

above. there are things that the primes can only do, and we have to leverage that capability, and there are a bunch of things that new entrants can do. the answer is them as i mentioned, all of the above. sen. mullin: i agree that primes are important, but they have failed miserably, on being on budget and time and adequately delivering today's needs. holding them accountable is important. i want to switch gears real quick about afghanistan. it is deeply personal to me, and i know it is to you and anyone else that had the privilege of serving the nation in afghanistan. because there is a disastrous withdrawal, but i know there's a

hesitation in our military to step forward and make that sacrifice again. i think there's a lot of doubt that united states is able to stand behind what our first mission is and then to bring pride to those that sacrifice. that brings a morale issue, to those that are still serving, though sometimes with the most experience in there. and i think we may be having a drain in the knowledge of those that have sacrificed so much. how have you found retaining those and restoring that trust back in the military that say hey, we got you, we are not going to leave you on the battlefield, we will not let your sacrifice died, but we are going to let you walk away with a tremendous amount of pride, knowing that your sacrifice meant something to this country. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, i appreciate the question trade that is one of our most important jobs as leaders,

whether at the chairman level or all the way down to the platoon level, inspiring those who serve, taking care of them always, but also making sure they know how much we appreciate them and their families and their services. sen. mullin: that does not address what happened. lt. gen. caine: well, senator, do you mean afghanistan? that withdrawal was not what anyone would have wanted. very difficult circumstances. i think the officers on the grounds did the best they could with those policy decisions that were made. we mourn the loss of the 13, and we have to hold those accountable if there was something for them to be held accountable for, and i know the department is looking into that. but, again, most of those professional military officers were executing the direction and orders of policymakers above them. sen. mullin: thank you.

>> general, is it accurate to say that afghanistan was a forever war? lt. gen. caine: i'm not going to say it was a forever war, but it certainly took a long, long time. chair wicker: what was the engagement of nato and american troops at the time of our disastrous withdrawal. lt. gen. caine: sir, i think there were still u.s. forces on the ground and nato forces on the ground. not exactly sure what your question is. chair wicker: where their casualties? lt. gen. caine: at the very end there were, yes, sir. chair wicker: there were no american casualties before then? lt. gen. caine: yes, sir. chair wicker: thank you.

senator gillibrand. sen. gillibrand: thank you. based on your understanding of classification and authority, do you believe that any information that was shared on the signal chat was classified at the time it was sent, particularly the details of the time income of the target, for the man's u.s. aircraft, and other details related to the exact plan? lt. gen. caine: senator, i did not see the original com op, as i mentioned in my testimony. i think we should always preserve the element of surprise, and that is a key and essential thing. sen. gillibrand: what would you have done if you are on that text chain? lt. gen. caine: well, first, i was not, and i think that was a political, partisan text chain with policymakers at the political level only, so i can't

hypothetically guess what i would have done. but we would not have -- sen. gillibrand: i would not call it a political or partisan text chain. it had the head of intelligence, the head of the cia, it had our secretary of defense how the national security top advisers to the president. and to share that type of information from a military perspective, i cannot imagine is a subordinate of yours shared that type of military information in an unclassified setting such as a signal text chain, they would be fired, would they not? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, as i mentioned earlier, i think, you know, the chairman and ranking member has called for an investigation, and so i think it is appropriate for me to withhold comment until such time that a is either determined that there will be an investigation or not. sen. gillibrand: well, what would you do in a different scenario, if you see classified

information or warplanes information or tactical information on an unclassified chain, what would you do to stop the conversation? lt. gen. caine: well, i think i was stop and weigh in if i were part of it, but in this case i was not. sen. gillibrand: thank you the worldwide proliferation of unmanned drones is a national security threat, creating challenges in both lending and capabilities. how do you think the departments and joint force should approach these two challenges of funding and capability? lt. gen. caine: senator, it is definitely a big challenge in front of us. especially small you a s's -- uas's is one that is important to me, from a technical standpoint and also policy standpoint. we have somewhat limited capabilities in some cases, inside the domestic u.s., to stop some of these uas's.

i think we have to continue to fund the research and development to counter them. sen. gillibrand: let's make it more direct to you. when you have drones hovering over langley for a tw-week period, appearing and disappearing without our authority is being able to trace it, without being able to follow the uas at his point of departure and point of return, that creates a national security risk, if those you a s -- uas's r&d being operated by -- are indeed being operated by russia, china, or iran feared what would you do? lt. gen. caine: senator, if confirmed, i will put the appropriate pressure to work in conjunction with northcom, who is doing a fantastic job on this and others, to continue to work with the private sector to find the capabilities that we must have that we currently don't

have to prevent this from happening again. sen. gillibrand: which capabilities don't you have? do you lack the authority, or do you lack the technological capability? lt. gen. caine: senator, i think it is a little bit of a mix of both. there are some authority issues related to airspace directly over u.s. military base's and then transitioning outside of the geographical boundaries of the military base and who has cognizant authority over those small you a s -- uas's at that point, and there are challenges about stopping them and guiding them. there's always collateral damage concerns and those types of things. sen. gillibrand: what you see as the authority to take down uas's above military bases? lt. gen. caine: if confirmed, i will speak with norad, northcom, and state and local authorities to make sure we are having those discussion points. sen. gillibrand: i would request

that you would review that legislation. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: do you have cosponsors? sen. gillibrand: i don't know yet, but i can ask. chair wicker: thank you very much. senator turbyfill. sen. tuberville: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here, your service, and congratulations on your nomination. you are nominated to be the senior military adviser to the president of the united states. what a chore. i remember a time with retired senior officers would avoid political discussions. it was extremely uncommon for a former senior officer to even endorse a candidate for political office. lately, that approach seems to be an exception, not the rule. some of your predecessors even appear to support political positions while in uniform. your predecessor was deeply involved in politics, which should not be part of this approach.

general caine, in your own words, how would you describe this committee the importance of your responsibility and commitment to provide the best military advice, even when that advice might differ from what the president of the united states believes? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, thank you for that question. it ultimately is the whole job, is to be the principal military adviser to the president, and pursuant to that job, provide the president with the best military advice, even when the president may have different feelings about it. and that is exactly what the nation pays me to do. so, if confirmed, that is exactly what i will do. sen. tuberville: general, when you take this job, what is your number one concern? lt. gen. caine: senator, right now, the number one concern is the passage of time and ensuring that the joint force is ready, properly armed with the right

capabilities out at the tactical edge, properly globally integrated with the services themselves, with the other elements of the inter-agencies, with our allies and partners and with the private sector, and ready to go tonight. that means their families are ready, they are ready, they are properly trained. and equipped so we have much to do, senator. sen. tuberville: we all know that the machines we build come of guns are critical to the war fighter, but it's usually the people involved from our recruiting much improved over the last couple of months. what do you see in your role as an advisor to the president and recruiting for all of our military? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, we'll have much of a military without the incredible two point 8 million members of the joint force that selflessly joined the service to do something more important than themselves.

and, you know, to answer your question, if confirmed, i think it is an opportunity for me to be another voice of encouragement for those young men and women who have the capability and meet the standards to come into the service and do something that they will forever hold so high in their past history. the chance to serve this nation is a special privilege for those of us who have come in the cloth of our nation and serve, and i hope that i will be able to encourage others to do so. sen. tuberville: being the chairman of the subcommittee of the personnel on armed services, we had a hearing last week with our west point academies, naval academy, air force academy. i would hope in the future, and i know your job is to inform our president and keep him advised of everything, but i think that your job, too, would be to work with our academies in terms of their leadership, build that

leadership to a higher standard, keep it to a higher standard, to build and let our young men and women know that that is where it all starts. if we don't have leadership, we don't have anything, and i think that is a good point, you know, that is passed on to the president. obviously, your information you get to the president is going to be number one, but also building, help build our military is going to be a huge part of your job. what do you think? lt. gen. caine: i agree, senator. sen. tuberville: thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. chair wicker: senator duckworth. sen. duckworth: thank you. i want to begin by expressing my appreciation for the outstanding service of general brown. general caine, i really enjoyed our conversations we had recently over the last couple of weeks.

if you are confirmed as chairman of the joint chief, you will serve as the president was the principal -- the president's military advisor, against a legal, immoral action regardless of partisan pressure. however, we are under a moment where that is under strain, where the general, responsible for providing legal expertise because their counsel did not align with the political preferences of secretary hegseth. this pattern has had a chilling effect. the lives of our service members and future of national security depend on expert qualified leaders to understand their decisions have real life or death consequences. how will you insulate and empower general officers across the board to remain professional and importantly nonpartisan and provide unbiased advice to civilian policymakers without fear of coercion, undue partisanship, or retaliation? lt. gen. caine: thank you,

senator. i enjoyed our discussions together. this is our job. it is like you and i both took our oath of office. it is what is contained in our commission and aligns with the constitution. so that is what the nation expect that of our professional officer corps and i'm sure what we will continue to do moving forward. sen. duckworth: will you do your best to ensure that the officer corps, those that give that advice, remain unbiased and nonpartisan? lt. gen. caine: always. sen. duckworth: well, maybe bias on the side of the service members. lt. gen. caine: yes. [laughter] sen. duckworth: thank you. and it is great to see a guard guy going through the confirmation hearings. lt. gen. caine: thank you. sen. duckworth: you will also be a in being a model and a leader for the joint force. recently, we witnessed blurred lines between private power and public trust. a lack of regard for protecting

vital national security secrets and accountability from top leadership. from elon musk receiving invitations to briefings with china, mishandling classified information, to secretary hegseth bring family members to sensitive meetings with allies and partners. very concerning way, we have seen a concerted effort to skirt transparency to the american people of the use of force, with decision-making being done over disappearing. signal chat it seems like this administration is more interested in keeping secrets from the american people than protecting national security secrets for the american people. you have experience running some of our most sensitive operations. you know that secrecy does not mean skirting accountability to the american people. do you commit to providing the legally required transparency to congress and the american people over decisions related to the use of force, even in the face of pressure from civilian leadership? lt. gen. caine: i do, senator. sen. duckworth: thank you. another concern and focus of this administration has been to distract members of the military from its core mission of

protecting the american people from external threats by redirecting military personnel, assets, and platforms to domestic law enforcement missions. president trump may have learned from his first term, to deploy the military to fire on civilian protesters was a no go, so instead, he has turned to this tactic, linking criminal activities to hostile governments like venezuela or terrorists like hamas in order to have military involvement. this kind of threat inflation is exactly what dictators do. the separation between military missions and civilian law enforcement is a core tenet of our democracy and exists not only to protect the rights of american citizens but also preserve the integrity of our armed forces. it places them at risk of moral injury, being asked to enforce partisan concerns rather than defend the nation. it compromises not just commissioned by their conscience. what steps will you do to ensure

that military assets are not inappropriately used in law enforcement capacity that distracts from the mission and threaten public trust? lt. gen. caine: well, senator, thank you for that question. i think there is, you know, strong systems in place, legal systems in place that prevent any missteps there. it ranges from title 32 authorities to title 10 authorities. i have no reason to believe that those are insufficient in any way. sen. duckworth: thank you. i look forward to working with you. mr. chairman yucca chair wicker: thank you very much, senator. senator sullivan. sen. sullivan: thank you, mr. chairman. i want to agree with others about commanding general cq brown for his exceptional decades of service. i fully agree with the accolades he has been receiving in this

community, and i wish him and his family the best fit i've met with, served under, and met hundreds as my position of a u.s. senator and u.s. marine, and i would say, general, i thank you are one of the most impressive officers i've met with. i don't say that lightly. like i said, i've met with hundreds. i think it is a combination of all the experiences, to senator duckworth's point, guard, reserve, private sector. you are bringing a lot in here, and i think that will be very important. i do want to touch on the topic we are bringing up a lot here, keeping politics out of our military could i could not agree more with that. i think it is really important. as part of my career here, i try to make sure that happens. but i would say, we are not just talking about what has happened the last four years. i think the military was politicized in a huge wake, particularly from the civilian leaders who were pushing left-wing theories on the military, pushing climate change

over ship building to the under secretary for policy came and told the committee that our military is "systemically racist." it is ridiculous, right? do you believe our military is systemically racist? is that what you saw in your 30 plus years? lt. gen. caine: no, senator. sen. sullivan: to make 100% sure what the secretary of defense's testimony can when he came here that our military professionals, need to remain apolitical and committed to our constitution, identify not as a public and then the request but leaders, is that your commitment? lt. gen. caine: it is. sen. sullivan: will you commit to this committee is doing that? lt. gen. caine: i will, senator. sen. sullivan: this quote from the father of the u.s. air force, billy mitchell, talking about his place in the world. whoever controls this place controls the world. it is the most strategic place

in the world. what places billy mitchell talking about? lt. gen. caine: alaska. sen. sullivan: do you agree? that's a yes, i am assuming you are saying. [laughter] our adversaries agree. you and i talked about this in my office. i appreciate the hearing. we had a huge number of incursions in the last two years, russian, chinese, joint russian-chinese strategic bombers, task forces, joint naval, we are on the front lines of great power competition with regard to our adversaries. you and i talked about infrastructure in alaska for the military. the president said we will ensure alaska gets even more defense investments as we rebuild our military, especially as russia and china are making

menacing moves in the north pacific. that's from the commander-in-chief. the northcom commander recently said that this very vital naval base, former naval base, a former subbase, airbase base, huge fuel depots. we have a navy team right there -- right now this week. can i get your commitment to work with me and this committee on infrastructure that can protect our northern flank because as the northcom commander recently testified, these incursions are only going to increase. lt. gen. caine: yes sir. sen. sullivan: let me talk about another issue that doesn't come up very often. you talked about reform to go faster with greater efficiency. one of our unsung success stories is aid a contractors working with the department of defense.

dod can use these contractors if they want, they don't have to, but they bring efficiency, speed, low cost contracts and quality services. i saw a recent example of an integrated request from dod to have a wheeled vehicle that can put a harpoon, anti-ship system on it. this aid a contractor got it designed in two weeks, produced inside of 12 months. they are already in taiwan. they are going to presume -- produce 20 more. can you commit to me to continue to work with these small businesses that i think the liver, efficiency and modernization? lt. gen. caine: i will. chair wicker: thank you senator sullivan. without objection, that chart

will be copied into the record. senator rosen. sen. rosen: thank you chairman wicker and ranking member read. my thanks to you, general caine for meeting with me. we had a great conversation about nevada and your willingness to serve but i want to keep on the subject of the vada assets. from your time as a director of special access programs and from your own experience serving at a data location, a duty station whose location and existence is classified, you are familiar with that the -- with the delicate balance between protecting sensitive information and ensuring servicemember records actually reflect their injuries at those locations. i've heard from constituents who served at such locations like the nevada test and training range or believe they were exposed to radiation from days of conducting explosive nuclear weapons testing and burn pits.

however, dod does not classify the range as a place where exposure occurred. despite the department of energy providing a presumption of exposure for their personnel who served their at these exact same locations within the range, and because their service records are data masked, these veterans cannot even prove to the v.a. that they were ever stationed there. there are six doe covered facilities, most of which are within the nevada test and training range where doe employees were presumed to be exposed to radiation, but our service members, the v.a. only recognizes one, the nevada test site as a presumed exposure location. one such facility that is covered for doe but not for dod is the tonopah test range. portions of the range are still fenced off and contaminated.

a 1975 environmental assistant acknowledged -- environmental assessment acknowledged the contamination and the harm it caused. but the airmen were never told. they do not have a presumption of exposure as their d.o.e. counterparts do. further adding insult to this, you can't even show that they were there. all of this has prevented them from receiving well-deserved veterans benefits. we need to make this right, and i'm committed to fixing this problem and i hope that i can count on your support to bric you do happen -- to making it happen. when you commit to finding a solution that provides dod the presumption of exposure at such data masked locations and provide those who served and are serving at these locations a way to sufficiently document so they can submit their health-related issues without ever compromising

the security of their service details? lt. gen. caine: senator, thank you for raising this in our office call and for your leadership on this matter. i do think we owe our service members a way forward from these important jobs that they can't ever talk about. i commit to staying close with you on this matter and trying to sort out a way to help them transition, take credit and -- in the risk they have bought in service of this nation. sen. rosen: i know the men and women who serve there will be very pleased to do this, it means a lot. i have about a minute left so i want to ask about the force of the future. you've gone through the rigors of training in nevada skies. you know personally our military readiness depends on immediate

war fighting needs while preparing for potential conflict. it requires evolving and changing how we trained to fight which is one of the reasons i fought hard to make sure nevada's military training ranges are modernized, keeping pace with emerging threats. if confirmed, how would you prioritize investments in readiness and modernization and force structure, especially in these emerging domains like cyber warfare and ai? lt. gen. caine: we've got to train to the realistic threat, in order to ensure we are prepared if we ever do go into conflict. part of that is making sure that our training ranges, either live, virtual or constructed accurately replicate the threat so that our war fighters can train to the realistic threat, and i think we still have some work to do both in our physical ranges and in our virtual ranges and if confirmed, that will be an area along the readiness line of effort i will spend some time

on. chair wicker: thank you senator rosen. senator blythe. sen. blunt: thank you for your willingness to serve. i enjoyed our meeting in my office last week. let's talk about china. their strategy for expanding their power, it is operating a lot in using gray's own tactics where military and civil action, somewhere between the boundaries of peace and war. it is difficult to confront with conventional military force. special operations forces are crucial for competing in the gray zone. can you talk about your views on the role of sop and what investments should be made to grow these capabilities? lt. gen. caine: thank you for that question. as someone who has probably been

a part of the special operations forces, i appreciate gracefully -- greatly the exponential forces that can provide to the nation and when i think about creating multiple dilemmas for xi jinping, many of those dilemmas are creating through -- created through america's special operations forces were rebuild great partnerships, help train our allies and partners and we are able to ask a look -- execute special missions that help us eliminate the threat and a more thoughtful way. i would agree with the admiral's views on soft -- s.o.f. forces in the pacific but would defer to a general who has strong views on that and if concern -- confirmed i will consult with him on those matters. sen. budd: i appreciate your commentary. in your advanced polisario ash

policy questions, you underscored the importance of synchronization between the dod and the intelligence community. how do you propose we do that? lt. gen. caine: it starts with trusting in deep relationships. i am fortunate in my last job to have learned the value of making sure that the best of the title x communities are linked up with the best of the title 50 community to get title 60 like outcomes. i put that in quotation marks. . if confirmed, i will continue with that pathway forward. we have an incredible associated director at the cia, lieutenant mike downs who is probably doing a much better job than i ever did over there. if confirmed i will continue to build on those relationships. i think it extends beyond just the dod and cia relationship. it extends into the relationship

we have with the state department, it extends into the relationship we have with the other elements in the agency as well. sen. budd: thank you. you also mentioned that the service chiefs and combat and commanders that use the un--- unfunded priorities list as tools to communicate with us in congress. the idea is to see areas where we could enhance military readiness and capabilities. you wonder -- you also mentioned the unfunded priority list is able to inform the budget. where do you think the dod is currently leveraging to align the defense budget with the defense strategy and where is there room for improvement? lt. gen. caine: i am not yet back in the service, so i would need to read the current version of the national defense strategy. sen. budd: best guess, outside looking in? lt. gen. caine: i think we need to continue our efforts in the pacific and that would -- in the

intel record. sen. budd: thank you. speaking to the value of the strike eagle. as a fighter pilot with extensive experience in combat missions, can you speak to the value and utility of the fourth-generation fleet, specifically the f-15 e and the f-16 which you flew, and if you find it wise to reduce these inventories prior to taking delivery of the potential replacements? i guess it is the divest to invest strategy. lt. gen. caine: thank you for that question. what we can't do is leave something uncovered in the interim and when i think about the f-16, they are predominately tasked with homeland defense at this point in time and we can't ever let another 9/11 happened so we have to make sure that we do not divest so much that we

lose coverage in places that we must have to sustain that combat capability. we need a -- until we get to the point where we are all where we need to be. sen. budd: thank you. chair wicker: thank you very much. senator warren. sen. warren: thank you mr. chairman and congratulations. if confirmed, you would serve as the principal military advisor to the president and swear an oath to defend the constitution of the united states. president trump wants -- once described your predecessor as quote, an outstanding leader. and it's true. they served for 40 years and seven assignments across four combat and commands. the president's removal of the

only black officer and the only female officer from the joint chiefs of staff has sent a chilling message about who is and who is not welcome in our military. this worries me deeply about the future of our military and the defense of our nation. i am also concerned that president trump wants to turn the chairman of the joint chiefs into another political position. last year president trump claimed you once said you would kill for him, and then you slept a maga hat on. i know others have disputed that story but it raises questions about whether you were selected because donald trump thinks that you would be loyal to him rather than to the constitution of the united states. secretary hegseth has now removed the top legal advisors for military services and recommended replacements at a

lower rank. lieutenant general caine, if confirmed, your job will be to present your best military advice. do you agree that in order to be able to comply with the law and make sure your advice complies with the law, that military commanders need legal advisors with both enough expertise and a high enough rank that they will be listened to during this process? lt. gen. caine: i do, senator. i've always had great legal advice regardless of what rank they were, but i do agree. sen. warren: so you need people who give good advice, but do you think it helps in making sure that others, i'm glad you listen to good advice to matter where it comes from, but that others are more willing to listen if the people offering legal advice

have high enough rank to carry some weight in the room when those decisions are taking place? lt. gen. caine: i do, although as i mentioned, i've sincerely had great legal advice from o -5's to o-7's. i think it is the human, the officer and their professionalism and intellect versus what rank they have. i do appreciate the efforts to ask the question about what rank they should be, but would defer to the secretary on what rank he would want them to be. sen. warren: that gives me some real concern because the whole point of elevating the rank was the concern that not enough people were listening to good legal advice, and while i appreciate that you say you listen, we need people to listen who are making decisions up and down the line. i understand lieutenant general

caine that the circumstances of your nomination are beyond your control, but they also place a significant burden on you to show leadership to restore public confidence in the military, and to show that you work for the american people. i have long been concerned by senior pentagon leaders who trade on their time in public service to cash out afterwards to work for defense contractors and that is why during his confirmation hearing, general brown agreed he would not become a lobbyist or join the board of a defense contractor after he resigned. lieutenant general caine, are you willing to demonstrate that you are taking this job to serve the american people and commit that after you leave this job you will not work for any major defense contractors or companies that are affected by your official actions? lt. gen. caine: for myself, i have no intent to do so.

sen. warren: so you can commit to that. lt. gen. caine: yes senator. sen. warren: president trump's removal of highly qualified and talented military leaders is a permanent stain on this nation's history as well as a blow to our ability to recruit the force that we need, to compete with china. if confirmed you will have an important responsibility to show the american people that you will defend our nation with integrity, that you will follow the law and that you will lead our men and women in uniform with integrity. thank you. thank you mr. chairman. chair wicker: thank you very much senator warren. we will now move to senator schmitt. sen. schmitt: good to see you again general, congratulations. let me first start by saying i think the people who talk the most about making sure you give

advice to president trump have no experience with president trump, interpersonally. he does seek out advice among a lot of people and i think your background and your experience will be invaluable to him as he asks tough questions and you give honest advice as you have committed here today. anyway, i think the dynamic is going to be great. i think your background and experience prepare you for this important role. i want to ask you about a couple of things. this great powers competition that we are in with china. i was happy to see president trump and secretary hegseth move quickly and not just deciding that we were going to move forward with next-generation air dominance but actually selecting the f-47 so we could move

forward. that was a bold stroke of leadership and decisiveness. it matters a lot in the indo pacific and with your experience i know that you can appreciate that. one of the big challenges we have that has been mentioned by a few already is the inability for us to go from point a to point b, we recognize a problem, how do we solve the problem? everyone recognizes it is an issue. we haven't made a lot of progress, up until this point, i think there is a commitment to do something about it all stop in your view, what would we do differently if we were at war right now? like if actual live rounds, we are at war, but we do differently on the procurement side and the execution side? lt. gen. caine: thanks for the

question. the germans bill filled on a book that was written about the defense industrial base in the 1930's and if we were in a gunfight at this point in time, we would be doing a lot more with a greater sense of urgency then we probably have right now and if i'm confirmed i will carry that sense of urgency that i think we share into the department and into the joint force to make sure that we do not end up in a case where our young war fighters do not have the kit they need prior to them needing it. sen. schmitt: that overwhelming force advantage we have is critical and the concern i have is that we talk a lot about it but we have to move forward on this. so before i run out of time, your experience in the military

and outside give you a glimpse of one of the challenges that we face. this is a missouri asset, the holt -- the home of the b-2 stealth bomber and soon to be the b-21. the 442nd fighter wing is also there. many of these units punch above their weight class. the a-10 is going away and i think there is a frustration that there has not been a follow-on mission and we talked about this in my office, and there are opportunities whether it is in the short-term, the f-15 e and the f-15 ex. the real danger because we have delayed these movements, the pilots don't have the certainty of knowing there is going to be a follow-on mission. will you work with my office and the folks that are responsible

for these decisions? we have to start making these decisions more decisively and timely and i think that whiteman stands right in front of that line. lt. gen. caine: i will, but i want to make sure i bring the air force leadership into the conversation as well. i've got very low throw weight on those decisions. sen. schmitt: i know but you are going to be in a very important spot and we've had conversations with the air force about this as well. with the last remaining seconds i will have, your view of this great powers competition with china, what are some things that we need to get better at? what are some things we need to do, to prepare for the -- as we shift and pivot to asia and the indo pacific? lt. gen. caine: with deep respect for the question, that is a pretty big question. sen. schmitt: what is one

important thing? lt. gen. caine: probably taking advantage of the time that we have as i mentioned earlier, making sure that we are moving with speed, precision, a sense of urgency to get the kit that we need. the challenges range from contested logistics to long-range fire to command and control. sen. schmitt: i look forward to working with you. chair wicker: will you supplement that on the record general? it was a very intricate question that was sprung on you with 10 seconds to go. lt. gen. caine: yes sir. you want me to do that now? chair wicker: just take it for the record. thank you very much. senator kelly. sen. kelly: i'm going to follow-up on senator schmitt's question in my second part if i have time because i think that is the big question of the day, how do we handle the challenges we will face in the western pacific.

general caine, congratulations on your nomination. it is a very important role. first, i want to talk a little bit about general milley. as a career military officer, lifelong public servant who served in this role as chairman under president trump and president biden, he is now facing an investigation by this administration and possible demotion. this is allegedly because he in coordination with the then secretary, mark esper made phone calls to chinese military officials to reassure them that the united states was not going to launch an attack, preventing on necessary conflict. general milley did this out of a deep respect and commitment to the constitution of the united states in my view. i asked about this in my office when we met privately, but i want to ask in this public setting. if confirmed to this position,

to whom or what do you swear an oath to? lt. gen. caine: senator, as i have for 34 years, it is to the constitution. sen. kelly: thank you. setting aside the specifics of the scenario. if necessary, will you choose the right thing to do even if it is hard over the easier wrong option? lt. gen. caine: senator, i've always strived to do the right thing and that is not going to change now. sen. kelly: thank you general. are you willing to get fired from this job for doing the right thing and following the constitution? lt. gen. caine: i am. sen. kelly: thank you. back to what senator schmitt was getting at, a part of what he wanted to discuss, i want to switch gears and go back to force projection, repositioning of forces and resource requirements. i think you mentioned trance calm -- transcom.

that is why i am reintroducing the ships for america act which is a bipartisan bill aimed at strengthening our commercial shipping base, which would have the added benefit of giving our combat commanders additional sealift capability so we can rapidly respond in crises and conflict. if confirmed, what will you recommend to the secretary of defense and the president, to ensure our industrial shipbuilding base, from forging supply chains and production are ready for competition in crisis? lt. gen. caine: i'm not in the job yet, i'm not back in the service yet, but if confirmed i would like to take that one for study and get back to you. sen. kelly: as you know, it is a logistical problem, 5000 miles of ocean, the chinese, they've

got to go just hundreds of miles to resupply their forces. i appreciate you being willing to take a look at it. one last topic. i want to talk about efforts across the department to modernize our acquisition process. this is a topic i'm focused on as the cochair of the defense modernization caucus. our system is too slow. it is too unwieldy. it cannot modernize at the pace of china. we currently cannot match them on how fast we can innovate, so we need to foster an ecosystem change that encourages some risk from small businesses so they can innovate faster and ensures a -- ensures technology meets the current demand signal. we have an effective mechanism to bridge the testing and

evaluation gap that often exists , to get that stuff over to production. if confirmed, what changes will you recommend to the secretary and the president to ensure we take advantage of smaller innovative companies and acquire at the speed that technology is moving forward? lt. gen. caine: we've got to have everyone weighing in. small businesses, new entrants and even the primes. the ability to bring advanced technologies from new companies, start ups into the joint force and make it easier for them to bring their products and services into the military is something that i am passionate about, given my background and experience. if confirmed, i think that will be an area where i spend some time. sen. kelly: thank you. chair wicker: thank you very much senator. senator banks. sen. banks: congratulations on

your nomination and thank you for being willing to come out of retirement and serve your country in this most significant way. i look forward of having a chairman of the joint chief whose only focus is national security. you have a hard road ahead of you. as you and i discussed, general milley modeled inappropriate and political behavior to a whole generation of officers and it is why i fully support president trump's decision to relieve general brown and the unconventional decision to go beyond the usual four-star choices and pick an outsider like you for this most important role. you spent much of your military career outside of washington, d.c., not exclusively inside of the pentagon and because of this you have a much better understanding of what is important to our war fighters and to the average american. you also know that the national guard often gets the short end of the stick in the budget fights, and having a chairman

who properly appreciates the importance of the guard is critical. because of all of that i can't wait to get you confirmed as soon as possible and i want to go back and talk. general milley was the most political chairman of the joint chiefs that i believe we've ever had. he actively undermined his commander-in-chief. general milley admitted to calling speaker pelosi and disparaging president trump's mental fitness and questioning his nuclear command authority. it was completely inappropriate and unacceptable. i want to ask you, how will you communicate differently than that with congressional leadership? lt. gen. caine: senator, i'm committed to open and transparent communication, transparent communication, but the first duty of the chairman is the advisor to the president. i would flow through that chain of command while providing options to the president. >> general milley admitted that

under his watch the pentagon wasted nearly 6 million man-hours on ddi and woke trainings. millie also testified to me before the house armed services committee that he wanted to read more about critical race theory and understand white rage. under your leadership, what kind of training can we expect our servicemembers to be focused on? gen. caine: war fighting, lethality and readiness. >> general milley was also the chairman during the disastrous afghanistan withdrawal and as a veteran of the war in afghanistan this is very personal to me. under his watch there is no accountability at all for the deaths of american heroes abbey gate, noah kahan ability for the chaos at the kabul airport, and noah kahan ability for leading americans behind. when military failure and incompetence result in the death of u.s. troops, do you agree that the officers in charge must be held accountable? gen. caine: senator, i

appreciate the question. the afghanistan withdrawal was not anything anybody would have wanted. it was very difficult circumstances and the officers on the ground had very little to do with the policies that they were directed to follow. we all mourn the 13 lost at abby gate. those officers i'm sure did the best in a situation that was not of their making. certainly, accountability is an important tenet in the united states, but i hope that we consider the fact that those officers were just doing the duties that they were assigned to do. >> you do agree that account ability matters, we should always learn from our mistakes and hold those accountable? general milley told his aides the president was preaching "the gospel of the fuhrer." i asked general brown last year for the house armed services committee if that was an appropriate and even general cq brown agreed publicly undergrowth before that

committee that that was a very inappropriate statement by general milley. do you agree with general brown that the chairman of the joint chiefs should never disparage the commander-in-chief, the president of the unit states of america? gen. caine: i do. >> general milley testified that he "does interviews regularly with print media, books, documentaries, video on tv" because "it is a part of a senior officials job." he also said he talked to the media 2, 3, 4 times a week. do you think that is appropriate use of the chairman's job? gen. caine: if confirmed, i will spend my time focused on the essential tasks in front of me. >> general milley promised chinese generals without the president knowledge that he would warn them if the united states was about to attack. do you think it is appropriate or inappropriate for the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff to warn our greatest adversary that we are about to attack and what we might do? gen. caine: no, sir>> i yield b.

>> thank you. i guess that does it, senator slotkin. you are recognized. >> i apologize for being late, we had some weather issues and some follow weather issues, i apologize. congratulations, happy to see you here. i just want to make sure we all are on the same page, the goldwater nichols act of 1986 is what established in law that the chairman is the principal military advisor to the president, also to the secretary of defense, the national security council. it mandates that you provide strategic direction to the armed forces, oversee strategic planning, program recommendations, budget proposals. it gives you a very big purview and i think president even issued a memorandum on

inauguration day that the chairman d.a. part of the national security council meetings at the highest level in the white house. so that's an extremely important role, especially now. i've heard that other members talked about the fact that there was no joint chief representative in the signal chain about military operations, eminent military operations, and i want you in those rooms giving your best military advice to anyone. i was keenly aware that all the decision-makers on that chain were all political appointees. there is not a single person there that was there just as a representative, as a military officer. there is no commander, nothing that i don't think missed anybody's notice. if confirmed, will you make a point to get into the rooms

where military operations are being discussed, planned at the strategic level, and when advice to the president is being given about the confidence in those military plans, will you push to be in that room? gen. caine: yes ma'am. >> good. we want you there. you know, i've asked a number of folks who have come up here very similar questions. people who have sat in that chair about the importance that i put in swearing and o to the constitution of the united states, not to any one president, not to any political leader. you will swear a note. you've done it many times before, this is not uncommon for you and your extensive experience. and i've asked all of these appointees or these nominees to say if the president asked you to do something that was unconstitutional, to use the military in a way that was

unconstitutional, to put military into the streets of our cities or policing in performing law enforcement roles which they are not trained for, etc. etc. if he asks you to do that, will you push back and lay down the law on behalf of the constitution, not for the president's whims? gen. caine: i will, senator. don't expect that to happen but of course i will. sen. slotkin: we don't expect it to happen but it did happen. under the trump administration the first time. secretary esther was asked to bring in the 82nd airborne active-duty military troops to put down a peaceful protest in washington, d.c. and in his own book he wrote that he convinced president trump in the dark of night not to do that. i don't need it to be public, i don't need you to have a public fight with president trump, i'm not asking that. i'm asking in the same exact situation, when you act

honorably in the same way and protect the rules of the road for the u.s. military, to protect the institution you've given your life for, and make sure that this country doesn't see their uniformed military as a political arm of any one party? will you stand up and push back similarly to secretary esper? gen. caine: senator, i think that is the duty and job that i have, yes. >> i appreciate that. there's lots of other important work we all want you to be focused on, the war fighter. these reports keep coming of the department of defense and uniformed military press outlets taking down jackie robinson's page and his service to the country. the tuskegee airmen, chaz such a connection to detroit, michigan. they are taking down, they are putting backup.

can you conform -- confirm that war heroes should be recognized by the department defense and it is not a damn dei thing to recognize worries of color? gen. caine: i think we should always recognize warriors, period. sen. slotkin: i hope you uphold that at this ridiculousness continues of erasing people from and military history. we look forward to you standing up it is good values. thank you for your work, and i yield back. >> thank you, senator, and this concludes today's hearing. i want to thank our distinguished witness for his testimony and without anything further, we are indeed adjourned.